Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1949
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Repository @ Iowa State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Repository @ Iowa State University. For more information, please
contact hinefuku@iastate.edu.
NOTE TO USERS
UMI
Ma^or Subject;
Soils
Approved;
Signature was redacted for privacy.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
UMI Microform DP13349
Copyright 2005 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
S59f
L317P
-ii-
fABLl OF COITEHTS
I.
II.
Page
1
IlfRODUCTIOI
RE?IEf OF LITSRAfURE
A.
B.
0.
D.
Darcy's Law
Equation of Flow
PerBieability Units
Methods of Measurement
1.
Laboratory metliods
a.
b.
2.
3.
Unlined wells
Lined wells
tracers
F.
Indirect methods .
Field methods
a.
b.
e.
S.
Entrapped air
Microorganisms
Salts
Temperature
Analytical methods
a.
b.
2.
3.
4.
5.
11
11
11
12
12
12
13
14
15
15
17
20
20
4
7
9
10
Bapuit-Forchheimer theory
Kirkhaai-Gardnex approach .
T "^0 40
21
21
21
25
26
27
28
29
31
-iiiPage
III.
THl PROBLIM
A.
B.
36
Field procedure
Field tests .
Laboratory procedure .....
Results of field tests ..........
Laboratory results
b,
36
40
45
50
68
73
Procedure
a.
IV.
36
74
77
84
96
LITSIATURI OlfED
97
1.
ACIIOfLED^ffilT
.103
-i-
LIST OF TABLES
Page
xao.
51
52
53
54
56
57
59
61
10
62
11
63
13
94
-V-
LIST OF FiaURlS
Fig.
Page
18
18
24
Points on let
34
Relaxation Pattern.
34
37
37
39
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Gardner (38).
Upper
39
44
44
47
47
48
69
69
-riFig.
18
Page
fariation of A-fuactioii ?dth. s, for a Cavity 4iaehes leag and l-iach in Maaeter.
71
19
71
20
75
21
80
22
81
23
Point on an Interface.-
86
24
See Text.
89
25
S@e Text.
89
26
91
93
27
28 fiquipotential
Soil
I.
IITROOTGTIOir
a hole in the soil below the water table and observed the rate
of rise of water in the hole.
Kirkham
to remote the soil from the interior of the pipe and they also
noted that a lauoh laore aecurate measure of the permeability was
obtained by permitting the water to flow into the pipe from the
soil rather than using the outward flow from the pipe into the
soil.
The
-o
has been developed.
Because
-4-
However this
Darcy's Law
These
5
faces of thte bed, and In-^erssly proportional to the thickness
of the hed.
law becomes
Q
K I A
(1)
where
Q = discharge "velocity
K = coeffioient of periseatoility
A s cross sectional area of bed
L = length of bed
h difference in head between outlet and inlet faces.
The B'alidity of Darcy*s law has been confirmed by many
experimenters, aost of ^om used sand separates in their tests.
Since OUT main interest is the application of Darcy*3 law to
the moveraent of water through soils we may consider SeelhetM
(60) to be the first in-s'estigator to use soil in a check of
Darcy's law.
Included in table 1.
fable 1
Relation of Pressure to Flow Through Clay - Seelheim (60)
Pressure
150 Gffl.
100 cm.
list
60
60
SjISas.
12 c
13 c
Me^
0.59 cc
0.39 cc
y=k(h,-h;)
h,-h.
t-v=kV$]
V
Fig. 1.
Gardner (38)
(in straight lines) and the only force opposing its motion is
the resistance of the walls of the capillary tubes (or soil
parti'cles).
then the flow becoaies turbulent and part of the energy of the
moving liquid is dissipated in eddy losses.
The flow is re
the aoveiaent of water through soils are well within the range
of the validity of Darcy's law and so we may safely apply it
in our soils work.
B.
Equation of Flow
(2)
oh
where
Slichter (63) was the first to show how Darey's law can be ap
plied to flow in any direction by rewriting eq, (3) in the form
where 4^
os
In case no
external attractive forces are acting and K^, Ky, K^, represent
the soil peraeability in the x, y, z directions then the equa
tion of continuity as deriTed by Slichter (63) ia
(3)
which is a osathematical statement that the liquid is inco/apreasible - that is, a given taass of the liquid does not chaise
its volume during the given motion.
If Kjj s Ky - Kg (ie, the soil is hostogenecaas) then eq. (3)
becomes
^ ^
ill = 0
The function
is called a potential
C.
Permeability Onita
(5)
where v quantity of water flowing per unit time per unit area
i as hydraulic grMient
be used.
Veloc
This uait
D.
Methods of Measurement
Laboratory methods
a.
This
The
der is then taken into the laboratory where permeability measmrements are made.
Indirect methods
Many soil properties such as hygroscopicity (59), pore
Firensan (23,
Field methods
a.
Unllned wells.
Tan Bavel and Klrkham (68) have developed ore exact formulas
based on solutions of Laplace*s equation and have applied the
method to several Iowa soils.
b.
Lined wells.
14oondition.
Tracers.
15-
S.
learly all of the work that has been done on the factors
which affect soil permeability has been done in the laboratory
and most of the results obtained are merely qualitative in char
acter.
Intrap-ped air
A review of the literature indicates that air entrapped in
the pores of the soil is one of the ma^or causes for the failure
of permeability neasuretaents made in the laboratory.
Evidence
The time
According
The appli
soluble in water and when water is added to the soil the car
bon dioxide goes into solution and an air-free soil results.
Wetting the soil under a mcuuffi is another technique used
to eliminate the errors due to entrapped air (64).
2.
Microorganisms
Recent investigation on the influence of microorganisms
matter may plug up the pores of the soil so that the permea
bility is markedly reduced.
-18-
PCRMEABtLITY
CW/HR.
STERILE SOIL-REINOCULATEO
CONTROL
20
30
40
50
60
70
TIME-DAYS
-19-
OQatinme for 10 to 20 days before the second
phase of Increase 1 apparent. The decrease
in permeability it probably due to structural
changes resulting in part from swelling and
dispersion f the dry soil upon wetting and
in part to dispersion resulting fro a de
crease in electrolyte content of the soil
solution as any salts present are removed
in the percolate.
The ster
20""
mnder long ambaergence.
3.
Salts
All soils contain oolloidal Material and the degree of
The presence
When
these salts are washed out the soil is deflocculated and the
permeability decreases.
Temperature
Poiseuille (53) studied the influence of temperature on
-31^
Hagn (1869) irerifiad Poiseuille^s relationship and found a 3^
increase in peraeaMlity for every increase in temperature by
one degree.
Gustafsson (31) pointed out that as long as Darcy*s law
holds (laminar flow) there is a linear relationship between
teaperature and perraeatoility.
F.
1.
Analytical methods
a.
Dupult-yorohheimer theory
(51, p. 359)
-22-
The
~.S.3-
ffleat oijcurs through the subsoil below the drain level AB.
The derivation follows: (See fig. 4)
* fed.y
dx
Ci a ky^
dx
Sinee the ground water surface reaains stationary, Q is equal
to the amount of water percolating downwards from the soil sur
face In unit time between P and 0, therefore
Q at q(^ - x)
and on integration
ic.y^ a EX - #
i
This ie the equation of an ellipse with center at D and semiaxis 1 and I'l
fhus the sumffiit of the ground-water surface
1
reaches a maximm height h; where h
Hence if the drains
are laid at a depth
G R O U N D
Free Water
S U R F A C E
Surface
(Phreatic Surface)
DRAIN
TUBE
DRAIN
TUBE
E
Fig. 4.
Kirtehaa-Gardner approach^
Recently
In addition he
images (See Muskat 51, p. 175) and the results were expressed
in conjugate fmctions.
-26-
surface and this aortaal derlirative was then integrated over the
surface of the soil.
lirkha*s. analysis,
2.
and outflow face of the dam are treated as separate flow sys
tems by different approximations, and are then synthesized by
the requirements that the fluxes through each shoxild be equal,
and that the fluid heads should be continuous in passing from
on part to the other.
located, the equipotential lines, each one representing a constiunt fraction of the total loss in head h, are drawn.
Streanh-
Oaaagrande (9)
The average
permeability will be
* Vk in k max
and the flow will b
q t
where
fhe hodograah
A hodograph is a representation of a dynamical system
Although
-28-
cunre which one obtains when plotting from one origin velocity
vectors for all the points of the flow line,
^e straight line
straight line.
Once the boundaries of the system are fixed (in the
hodograph plane) the methods of conjugate-function theory can
be applied to the final solution of the problem, although the
transformations of the circular segments representing the free
surfaces involve the theory of modular elliptic functions (See
Musfcat 51, p. 301).
4.
Mesi^rane aaalomie
la a study of the uplift pressures on large dams, Brahtz
29-,
for the percolation witMn an earth or concrete mass has the
same form as the differential eqmatioa for small normal defleotiona of a niforly stretched rubber mefflbrane (Laplace's equatioa).
The or
(6)
porous media is
Q
|4.
(7)
OS
A copper foil
-31-.
6..
Muwerlcal methods
Iimcrical methods of solving two-dimeasional partial
differential equations involve the replacement of the continmum of points in a region considered, by a discrete set of
points, and the replacement of the differential equation by a
finite difference equation.
The
332ro,
and by making
two solmtions with different h, one can estimate the differ#ae of @a(^ from the solution of the continuous problem,
Shortley, Isller, and Fried (62) have studied the rate
of convergence of the Lietomann procedure by investigating the
rate of convergence of an arbitrary *error" function as the
saffle iaprovement formla is used repeatedly.
The "error*
As a result of
would be necessary.
In an effort to speed up the rate of convergence, various
procedures have been devised hich treat whole groups of points.
This so called block procedure has been applied by Shortley
(62), Southwell (65), and others with success.
Southwell (65) developed the "relaxation* method which is
"33"
superior to the Itiebaiaaa proeedure in the length of tirae re
quired to solire th protolem.
+ <i>^' H <i>^
d)' .
Specifically, if
4'
The
4),
^4
(I)o
(|)2.
*^3
fiit S.
fif# i#
fnflwtii
3&~'
'
^
^ ^
^ yy
However in
-36-
III.
fHE PROBLEM
A.
1*
-37-
^ PIEZOMETER
SOD REMOVED
^SOIL SURFACE
\i n 11 I / I ! I I ! II III I
WATER TABLE
-2R
y
I^CAVITY
/ FLOW
LINE
s 2r
IMPERVIOUS
I I I I I I / I I I I I I 11
111111111111
111 11 I I / i/iLIAYFR
7.
8.
lastailing th Piezometer.
38*"
5 inoliea,
It is
In more permeable
In highly permeable
-39-
10
40-
Field tests
Preliminary tests on prairie soils under continuous pas
through the sod caused a ball of roots and soil to form upon
the end of the piezometer.
In heavy soils
there was less tendency for the saturated soil to slip off
the carpenter's bit than off the soil auger.
It was
pipes were used and were satisfactory for the iBeasurement, but
their weight made them difficult to transport in the field.
addition, water pipe corrodes very easily.
In
Three diameters
of conduit were tried, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 inches and all of them
worked satisfactorily.
10-foot lengths.
truding from the end of the wooden rod touched the water sur
face in the piezometer the circuit was completed causing^ the
milliammeter to deflect.
inches and a set screw in the brass collar enabled the oper
ator to fasten the rod at any elevation.
leadings were faade in the following ma^er; the rod was
set at aorae predetermined height and the operator waited
til the rising water in the piezometer reached the rod.
un
A
stop watch was thegi started and the rod teoved up on inch
(or any desired distance).
meter, the first stop wateh was stopped and a second stop
watch started,
recorded
The collar attachment that fit over the end of the pipe
also held a small horizontal square of plywood that served as
a platform for the ffiilliaaaaeter, the battery, and a notebook.
The rod-type of probe was not very satisfactory for two
reasons, (l) it was awkward to carry in a oar and in the field,
A weight consisting of
an insulated brass sleeve fit over the end of the wire that
dropped down inside of the piezometer and the other end of the
wire was hooked onto the reel.
desired elevation.
venient to operate in the field and was ouch more compact than
the rod-type probe.
The soil tube Jack used to reruov the piezometer from the
-44-
fig. 11.
Fig. 12,
Special
eters and the rollers were removed from the yoke when these
larger grips were used.
Although
the pipe was too large for the grip, no difficulty was encoun
tered in its use.
Laboratory procedure
The general solution for the problem of flow into a
cylindrical hole with impervious walls and with open end below
a water table, was given by lirkham (41).
The expression
[linCcl-id.VCol-ya.)]
A (w-tj
The .A-fuac-
Frevert (2?) de
Briefly the
~47
h
'ouKcice of
El(Zx:trc'tLjte
tZleciro cli
Fig, 13.
\ooo Ctjcl
Altar-nqto'
Proba
Copper Lined Tank-
"burfcice of
ELl^^ct rol Ljtt:
E l;ctrod<z
Q
Copper Bo-ftomTank- L
(2he-o'5,tat-
Mc-cid
onc-s
Variable
20
UJ
100
200
T I M E
''If* M*
300
I N
400
500
S E C O N D S
tf ffM l&tii te
Ms3r Ml&HmMp
Mmm
aai f i m t
600
The
vn
^ere
r 5= radius of the soil ca-rity
S5 radiws of cylindrical electrode
cr specific condttotiTity of the tank electrolyte
-TL = electrical resistance between the cylindrical
electrode and the copper tank bottom
k non-indmctiTe Wheatstone Bridge was used for measuring
with 500 cycle AG current at 6 ^olts for the power supply.
Sarphones were used for balance detection*
-50-
4.
Results M usM mm
la the first field tests the piezometers f/ere driven into
fhe perffleability
approximately the same as, the value obtained with the method
of successive angering.
Site IJ
Site description: Tbe soil was a Webster silty clay loam. The
tests were soade on Black's Seed Farm about 3 miles south of Ames.
The Webster soil was formed from glacial till material and the
surface soil, which was in permaneat pasture, supported a dense
growth of grass that was matted into a heavy turf. The top 24
inches became progressively lighter in color, grading into a
grayish mixture of sand, clay and small gravel at 3 to 4 feet.
Table 2
Field Test Data
>ipe
lo.
Inside
Diameter
of Pi'oe
(ia.1
Depth
Saj^le
{feet)
A(in.)
t2-tx
K(in/day)
corrected
to 20O C
1
2
3
4
0.756
0.756
0.756
0.756
2
2
2
2
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
0.197
0.140
0.159
0.176
725
514
586
648
1
a
3
4
0.756
0.756
0.756
0.756
3
3
3
3
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
0.312
0.212
0.332
0.290
1150
784
1222
1069
1
2
3
4
0.756
0.756
0.756
0*758
4
4
4
4
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
0.310
0.425
0.368
0.294
1144
1569
1355
1081
Average
Permeability
(in/dav)
618
1056
1287
Standard
Deviatim
(in/dav)
90
192
221
-52Sit 111
Juae 10 1948
Pipe
lo.
1
2
3
4
5
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
Iaside
Diaaaeter
of Pipe
(Ifit)
Depth
Sample
(feet)
tg-ti
K( l n /day)
corrected
to 20 C
0.0725
0.0490
0.0573
0.0790
0.0705
0.0733
788
532
622
860
767
798
A(in.)
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2
2
a
2
2
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
3
3
3
3
3
3
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
0.0805
0.1045
0.0815
0.0876
0.0805
0.0745
878
1140
888
955
878
813
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
4
4
4
4
4
4
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
0.0773
0.0745
0.0750
0.0795
0.1120
0.1060
840
810
814
862
1218
1150
2
3
4
Average
Permeability
(in/day)
Standard
Deviation
(ia/day)
728
925
949
114
207
116
52^
Site HI; July 10, 1948
file Bieaaureaeats were made ia a permaneat pasture located 6 miles
eaat of fhitiag, Iowa, near tbe relocated channel of the Little
Siomx River* fhe aoii resembled Luton olay at the surface tout
the subsoil was much lighter than typical Luton. The surface
was a heay plastic clay to a depth of 2o inches becoming progre88i"ly lighter in texture at greater depths. Layers of pure
sand were encountered at 4 feet.
Table 4
Field Test Bata
Inside
Diameter
of Pipe
(in.)
Depth
Sample
(feet)
A(in.)
InU-yi)
U-y2^
tg-tl
1
2
3
4
5
S
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
3
3
3
3
3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
13.3
12.3
0.000326
0.000324
0.000287
0.000350
0.000350
0.000358
1
2
3
1.0
1.0
1.0
4
4
4
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.0112
0.0116
0.0112
Pipe
lo.
A-rerage
Permeability
(in/day)
Standard
Deviation
(in/dav)
3
4
1.82
63.6
0.147
1.30
K(in/day)
corrected
to 20 0
1.79
1.78
1.51
1.92
1.92
1.97
61.8
64.2
61.8
SM
Site Ii
Inside
Diaaeter
of Pipe
(in.)
Depth
Sample
(feet)
1
a
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
2
2
2
15.0
15.0
15.0
0.000662
1
2
3
4
5
6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
3
3
3
3
3
3
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
0.000790
0.04190
0,000681
0.03234
0.0150
8.1
430
7.0
330
0.0
150
1
2
3
4
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
3
3
3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.0828
0.1061
0.000434
0.001069
470
580
2.4
5.9
1
2
3
4
5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
0.0001965
0.3848
0.000185
0.0255
0.000645
2.0
390
1.9
260
6.6
1
2
3
4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
4
4
4
4
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
0.0000110
0.000320
0.0000110
0.00120
Pipe
Ho.
A(in.)
inid^dO)
yd-yaj
K(in/day)
corrected
to 20 G
0.003495
6.8
0.0
35.6
.11
3.3
.11
1.2
Table 5 contizmsd
wOCQ
III
a
3
3
3.5
4
Average
Permeability
(in/dair)
ai.2
154.7
264.6
132.1
1.2
Standard
JDe-riation
Comment
(In/day)
20.8
175
304
182
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.0
1.5
1.5
inch
inch
inch
inch
inch
pipe
pipe
pipe
pipe
pipe
5e-
Site ;
Pipe
lo.
Inside
Diameter
of Pipe
(in.)
1
2
3
4
5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1
2
3
4
5
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
l.S
1.5
1
2
3
4
1.5
1.5
1.5
5
6
Depth
Saffiple
(feet)
A(ln.)
2
2
2
2
2
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
IS.O
0.000309
0.000415
0.000191
0.000105
0.000387
3.2
4.2
1.9
1.1
3.8
2
2
2
2
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.000431
0.00166
0.000350
0.00136
2.4
4.1
1,9
7.4
0.0
0.0
0.0000548
.56
0.0
0.000458
0.000510
4.7
5.2
0.0
'
K(ln/day)
correct^
to 20 0
tg-ti
3
15.0
3
15.0
-Hit a rock-
3
15.0
3
15*0
3
15.0
Average
Permeability
(in/dav)
Standard
Deviation
(in/day)
Comment
2.85
2.58
2.08
1.33
2.67
2.65
-57Site ?I;
Pipe
lo.
Inside
Diameter
of Pipe
(in.)
Depth
Sample
(feet)
A(in.)
id-ra)
*8-*l
K(in/day)
corrected
to 20 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.00356
0.0520
0.0130
0.0219
0.00943
0.0680
0.0820
19.6
286
72.0
120
52
385
450
1
S
3
4
2.0
2.0
s.o
2.0
3
3
3
3
17.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
0.0163
0.00456
0.01154
0.00610
260
73
185
100
1
3
3
4
5
6
7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
13.3
12.3
12.3
0.01048
0.00326
0.00176
0.00130
0.00326
0.00579
0.00041
1
2
3
4
2.0
3.0
17.0
Hit rock-^
-Hit rock
17.0
58
18
9.7
7.2
18
32
2.3
0.00650
104
0.00181
29
-58-
fatole 1 continued
Stwinary of Field Data
Depth
Sanplc
(fett)
3
3
4
4
A-^erag
Perffleability
(in/day)
197.8
154.5
20.7
66.5
Standard
Deviation
(in/day)
174
85
19.1
52.9
Comment
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
inch
inch
inch
inch
pipe
pipe
pipe
pipe
-59.
Site 11:
^pe
^0.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
1
3
3
4
6
6
7
8
1
2.
3
4
1
S
3
4
Inside
Diaaeter
of Pipe
Depth
Sample
(feet)
A(in,)
*2-l
(in,)
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
.756
.756
.756
.756
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
.756
.756
.756
.756
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2
2
2
0,01052
0.01230
0.01340
0.00886
0.01900
Hit a rock~
0.0368
0.01058
K(in/day)
corrected
to 20 0
58
68
74
49
110
2
2
2
2
12.3
12.3
13.3
12.3
12.3
13.3
12.3
12.3
3
3
3
3
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
0.0146
0.00002
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.00427
0.00496
0.000886
Hit a rock
0.0128
Hit a rook
^Hit a rock
4
4
4
4
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
0.00000115
0.00000176
0.0000304
Hit a rock
0.004
0.006
0.11
4
4
4
4
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.000531
0.00305
0.00000697
^Hit a rock
2.9
16.8
.039
0.00854
205
58
500
0.07
0.0
294
23.5
0.0
27.3
4.9
71.5
Table 8 coatinued
SuffiBJary of Field Data
Depth
Sample
{feeti
Average
Permeability
(in/da)
Standard
Deviation
(in/day)
2
3
3
4
4
88.8
198
85.2
0.04
6.6
17.3
357
88.3
0.085
12.7
CoBunent
1.0 inch pipes
.756 inch pipes
1.0 inch pipes
.756 inch pipes
1.0 inch pipes
-61Sit VIII:
Pipe
lo.
Inside
Diameter
of Pipe
(in.)
Depth
Sample
(feet)
A{ln.)
tg-tx
K(ln/day)
corrected
to 20 C
1
3
3
4
5
6
7
1.0
1.0
- 1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
12.3
12.3
13.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.00280
0.02215
O.OB980
0.05430
0.04355
0.05100
0.06550
15.4
122
495
300
240
281
360
1
2
3
4
5
6
f
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
Hit rook
^mt rock
0.01886
0.02410
0.01214
0.001008
0.03910
104
133
67
5.6
216
Average
PermeaMlity
(in/day)
Standard
De"yiation
(layday)
259
105
156.4
74.5
-62-
Site IX:
Inside
Diameter
of Pipe
ipi
-Mm 11
Depth
Sample
(feet)
A(in,)
1
2
3
,4
3.0
2
2
2
2
17.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
0.00996
0.00955
0.00641
0.00595
159
153
103
95
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3
3
3
3
17.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
0.0145
0.00643
0.00716
0.00488
232
103
114
78
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
3
3
3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
Pipe
lo.
2.0
3.0
2.0
3
3
4
1
2
3
4
ln4Mll
(d-yg)
t3~ti
0.0243
134
0.0289
159
0.0145
80
Damaged pipe
Average
Permeability
(in/day)
127
132
124
Standard
De'S'latioii
(In/day)
33
68
40
Comment
2.0 inch pipe
2.0 inch pipe
1.0 inch pipe
-63Site 1:
>ipe
lo.
Inside
DiMeter
of Pipe
Depth
Sai^le
(feet)
A(ln.)
(in A
(d-ya)
tg-tl
K(in/day)
corrected
to 20 C
1
2
3
1.0
1.0
1.0
1
1
1
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.00727
0.00431
0.00251
53.1
34.5
20.2
1
2
3
4
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2
2
2
2
17.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
0.00100
0.00024
0.00040
0.00018
27.0
5.7
9.2
4.2
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.00055
0.00170
0.00157
0.00114
0.00093
0.00061
0.00125
0.00165
44.5
14.0
12.7
9.2
7.6
6.6
10.1
13.3
1
3
3
4
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3
3
3
3
17.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
0.000448
0.000075
0.0000064
0.0000257
10.4
1.8
0.15
6.0
1
2
3
4
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
3
3
3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
0.000001
0.000000
0.000030
0.0000003
0.010
0.00
0.24
0.0024
1
2
3
3.0
2.0
3.0
4
4
4
17.0
17.0
17.0
0.000029
0.0
0.0000013
0.67
0.00
.030
-64.
Table 11 ooatlamed
Suamary of Field Data
Depth
Sample
^feet)
1
2
3
3
3
4
Aterage
Fexaeabllity
(layday)
35.9
11.5
14.7
4.S
0.063
0.23
Standard
Deviation
(ia/day)
11.2
9.5
4.1
4.6
0.205
0.535
Oommeat
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
inch
inch
inch
inch
inch
inch
pipe
pipe
pipe
pipe
pipe
pipe
Although a standard
The vari
-66obtalned.
The soil at Site IX was quite uaiform and offered an
opportunity to check the validity of the method by comparing
the results obtained with a 1 inch piezometer with the results
of a 3 inch piezometer.
in the West.
Leakage along the walls of the piezometer may be serious
in some soils and when it occurs, the values obtained for the
permeability will be too high.
Ho
-67-
By
Hoi^
In most cases
-68-
Talmes.
On the Tery permeable soils at Sites I and II, it was
difficult with the equipment used to obtain readings at a
depth of more than a few inches beneath the water table.
?ilhen
readings are taken close to the water table, any small error
in the water table aeasureiaent or any drawdown effects will
cause a very large error in the permeability figure obtained,
for these reasons it was thought advisable to take all readings
at least six inches below the water table and deeper if pos
sible.
5.
Laboratory results
Fig. 16 shows the variation of the A-function with diameter
The data
This is shown by
A cavity 4 inches
-6930
zm
CO
LlJ
TY ^ MNC:HES LorsIG
o 20
5 10
I
<
30
c/)
0
1
20
J L
UJ
X
ER
/
3
ij.
'k
0
Fig. 17.
- ^ t;
This curve brings out the important fact that if d and s are
both large corapared to w, the
with d and s.
A-function valies
inappreciably
- >
if d 5^ w and s
l/2w; and
will be about 25^ too large when obtained from fig. 16 or 17.
The curve is relatively flat between d w and s 1/2w.
It
^
^ ^
fL^n
A^fjA*'
I
2. Y
[212
I^
z
=8
z
o
g4
3
Lid>
< 0
I
8
,1 I
12
+ -! s S4 f
s+w
20
16
y:
t ^^'s
.-ik
u.j
Sf-'-' fii --
s =0
-t
'(
5 ^ ' - '
=0
24
,r < i
28
S-'
PIEZOMETER
XABli
WATER
100
KX)
985
L50
ko
-70
IMPERVIOUS
LAYER
, , ,,
Fig. 19.
-^'.r -f-'"'-! - . . M
-.T2ia from this portion of th cur-r that values were obtained for
fig. 16 and 17.
Strictly speakiag, if the soil consists of stratified layers,
the A-fmction depends mpon the soil permeability ia each of the
'i
layers, and mpon the dimension of the layers as well as the diffieasioa of the oa^rity.
the oavlty than the length of the cavity the effect of these
layers, regardless of their permeability will be small.
This
(A)
fith d 1 foot, w a 4
fhe A-function
was measured and found to be reduced 11.Si from the value with
out the impermeable layer,
In these experiments,
inoto piezometer.
Another ctoeck on the proposition that only the soil in a
small region about the canity contributes to the soil permeabilitf was obtained by determining (with the model) the equipotential surfaces about the "cavity" as shown in fig. 19.
The
The
uous from the cavity to the soil surface, their effect was
generally small.
the A-function.
B,
~f4-
Several examples
Procedure
Following a suggestion of Dr. R. . Gaskell, Department
Ho special training in
fill.
loo'f^
300^
I
K 1
600 ,
400
900
8 75
866
860
1500^
1000
994
989
976
900
873
865
853
300
600
700
669
650
6 32
680
700
672
6 35
652
620
500
4 I7
389
374
500
408
366
350
500
395
3 75
367
too
700
7I6
'lOOO^
-OH
o
too G
f ummrn
40 0
of
is
On com
with
-77-,
h, 1, are
The sec
For
The
The flow
-78-.
In
The
The
po
of
the
792 ro.
This,
(i>H f <^a/h
3 + </h
(10)
(11)
TABLE
WATER
loa
000
846
836
1000
1000
1000
877
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
973
96!
935
1000
849
872
896
916
932
945
954
961
966
970
972
974
975
975
687
744
796
837
870
894
912
925
934
940
945
948
950
950
507
622
708
770
815
8 49
874
892
904
912
919
924
926
927
534
646
720
772
812
841
861
877
887
8 95
901
905
906
534
624
692
744
785
813
835
852
865
8 75
882
886
887
6 27
682
728
766
792
815
832
846
857
865
8 70
870
670
648
412
383
U
560
sJ 336
n
864
894
316
297
415
4$4
460
500
560
544
564
724
608
80!
839
561
598
641
683
721
7 55
779
801
81 8
832
842
851
856
8 58
604
627
657
690
720
74 9
771
790
807
821
831
840
845
845
634
649
671
6 96
721
746
765
783
799
813
822
831
834
835
605
595
632
629
649
650
719
664
en
777
6 5^
665
682
702
722
744
762
7 79
794
806
814
823
827
829
665
674
688
706
724
742
7 60
777
792
804
813
820
825
827
669
677
692
707
724
742
760
791
803
81 3
819
823
824
///A
MP
660
661
663
665
Fig. 21.
7 76
-81-
li
a
' 0a
0.
-a- ^
01
-82-
In this case
to the drain.
Ihile the equipotential plots are of interest, of far
greater value is the fact that the flow into the drain can be
calculated from the equipotential curves,
(IS)
-83-
be
along the water table was 1 foot and the thickness of the soil
considered, in the iircctioa perpendicular to the plane of the
figure, is also taken as 1 foot, each value of
plied by an area 1 square foot,
up all of the K
was multi
( t +
oo
^-1)*^ In Lsinh%TTnh/a-sinh^7rr/a])/
(sinh^g-rmh/ a-sinh^TT( Sd-r)/a]
-84:-"
where I = permeability in feet/'day
t thioknea of ponded water (taken as zero in this case)
d w distance from surface of water table to center of tile
drain, taken as 4 feet
h - distance from the water table surface to the impermeable
layer, here aseumed to be 12 feet
a = distance between the tile drains, taken to be 28 feet
-85-
problem.
and for this probleia the depth was taken to be 24 inches, which
is probably deeper than the average.
to have the saiae permeability as the surface soil and the depth
from the soil surface to an impermeable layer was set at 10.5
feet, and the tile spacing was set at 20 feet.
The
0a)-3a(TT'-tT) (13)
'
-86-
1
!(S.
1
1
1
1^3
1
1
Fig. 23.
Point on an Interface
d<l)
<t>2.-0O
4>,~<i>o
a.
<t>o~ d)^
<t)o-
' ft.
+ 4 K-^= 0
^
<1^2, and
permeabilities Ij
and
and K|j or
%- %
Ky between
(|>, and
it equals Eij.
^11
ad
bilities gives
^ K l f K a j ^ da.- (to ^ ^Kl+Kg ^ ^ <tb- <l>^ ^
Ku-^^=
Ki
CL
Kn
O-
"8S
ax
j_
(^)
(^)- ir (^)
a. V 2. / ^ ^
^ (K,
<^oJ
(15)
%
00
<p/l
0,
i4.
(f)A
SIBI
at lipit
S4it
0o
Hi
I0z
fig# is#
ft*i.
The values
At points close
to the drain tube the fmotion changed rapidly and a fine net
was required to give the desired accuracy.
At points away
from the drain tube, the desired aocuraoy was attained by Uie
coarser nets,
The
1000
WATE
TABLE
1000
1000
1000
37 942
5M Ml
B60 681
///////A M
Fig. 36.
OUS////////LAYER"
-92-
WATER
TABLE
Z/////// IMPERVlbUS^/-^////LAYER'/////Zy/^///
Fig. 27.
-93"
WATER
Fig. 28.
TABLE
-94Table 12
Results of lumerical Analysis
%/%l
Q( ft3/day)
!
5
10
100
6.289
2.905
3.667
2.586
100.0^
46.1
42.4
41.1
Calculated
It is clear from the results that when the ratio of the
permeabilities Ej/Kji is 8 or greater, very little water flows
through the subsoil,
angle would be 90 .
We may conclude, therefore, that on the Edina soil, which
has a peraeability ratio of at least 10, very little flow takes
place thxoxigh the subsoil when tile drains are placed at four
foot depths.
(17)
In cot irr/qh
-95-^
To compare the relative advantage of placing the tile at
the bottom of a four foot trench, as was done in the problems
here solved, or of placing the tile at a 2 foot depth vdth half
of the tile embedded in the impermeable layer, the drain flux
was calculated for h d 2 feet, r .25 feet, K 1 foot/day,
t 0.
The result is
Q a 2,371 cu. ft. per day
-96.
IV.
the soil below a water table, the soil is augered out of the
pipe and the rate of rise of the water in the pipe is measured,
fhe permeability is then calculated from the rate of rise by
means of an appropriate formula.
occur in the permeability formula.
Readings can
Special
The
-97-
V.
LIfERATURE ClfED
(1
(3
(3
(4
Soil physios.
1940.
(5
(6
Bewley, L. V.
neering.
(7
(8
(9
(10
(11
(13
-98fhe water taMe, equipotentials and streamlilies ia draiaed laad; V. The moviag water table.
Soil Scl. 63:361-376. 1947.
Ghristlansen, J. E. Effect of entrapped air upon the
permeability of soil. Soil Soi. 58:355-365. 1944.
Sojie periaeability characteristics of saline
and alkali soils. Agr. Ingr. 28:147-153. 1947.
-99-
(30)
(31)
(32)
(33)
(36)
(37)
(38)
-100(40)
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)
(45)
(46)
(47)
(48)
1944.
-101
(53)
(54)
(55)
Reynolds, 0* Aix experimental investigation of the oircumstaneea which determine whether the motion of water
shall be direot or sinuous and of the law of resistance
in parallel channels. Roy. Soo* (London) Trans.
174:935-983. 1883.
(56)
(57)
Amer.
(58)
(59)
(60)
(61)
(62)
(63)
(64)
Jour.
-102-
McGraw-Hill,
-103-
TI. AQUOfldDSSlffilT
The